Category: Current Law Journal

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
For the plaintiff – Terence KM Chan (Tan Shin Shin with him); M/s Lim Kian Leong & Co

High Court

TORT: Negligence – Breach of duty – Fiduciary duty – Whether first and fourth defendants owed fiduciary duty to plaintiff – Whether duties and interest conflict -First and fourth defendants’ knowledge of second defendant’s actions – Whether reasonable diligence exercised – Whether negligence proved

TORT: Conspiracy to injure – Intention – Whether defendants conspired among each other to cause detriment to plaintiff – Whether there was common purpose among defendants – Whether defendants had predominant purpose to injure plaintiff – Whether plaintiff suffered damages

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
For the appellant -Chan Kah Meng & Veronica Ong; M/s Lim Kian Leong & Co

Court Of Appeal

Commissioning of Goods – fitness for the particular purpose – whether a spray painting system sold by the Appellant to the Respondent was not fit for its purpose due to failure to design the system which would be able to carry materials of a certain minimum weight – whether the Respondent relied on the expertise of the Appellant in designing and constructing the system.

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
For the company – KM Chan and Veronica Ong; M/s Lim Kian Leong & Co

Industrial Court

The issue before the Court in whether the Claimant’s dismissal by the Company that with just cause or excuse.

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
For the defendant – Lim Kian Leong (Rachel Tan Pak Theen with him); M/s Lim Kian Leong & Co

High Court

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Striking out – Action – Plaintiff’s action against defendant based on contracts with unlawful objects and/or consideration – Defendant applying to strike out action – Pointless for plaintiff to go to trial

CONTRACT: Void contract – Consideration unlawful – Contract attempting to circumvent requirements of statute – Such contract void under s. 24(a) and (b) of Contracts Act 1950 – Impossible to sever unlawful part of contract from lawful part – Such severability prohibited under s. 25 of Contracts Act 1950 – Contracts Act 1950, ss. 24, 25

CONTRACT: Illegality – Contravention of law – Contract attempting to circumvent requirements of statute – Such contract unlawful – Approach of court when illegality suspected

CONTRACT: Illegality – Public policy – ‘Ali Baba’ type of companies – Contracts to establish such companies illegal and contrary to public policy

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
For the Respondent – Lim Kian Leong; M/s Lim Kian Leong & Co.

High Court

The issue is whether proceeds from the sale of lands by the Respondent should be charged with income tax under the Income Tax Act 1967 or real property gains tax under the Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
(Civil Appeal No: W-02-677-2007) For the appellant – Lim Kian Leong; M/s Lim Kian Leong & Co

(Civil Appeal No: W-02-708-2007) For the appellant – Lim Kian Leong; M/s Lim Kian Leong & Co

Court Of Appeal

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Amendment – Writ of summons and statement of claim – Defamation suit – Case not set down for trial – Proposed amendments to set out with greater clarity defamatory nature of statements by way of innuendo other than in their natural and ordinary meaning – Amendment allowed

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Amendment – Writ of summons and statement of claim – Principles applicable – Whether prejudice suffered by defendant could be compensated by costs – Whether new facts and issues raised – Whether application for amendment one year and seven months after "Agreed Issues To Be Tried" constituted inordinate delay – Whether proposed amendments a tactical manoeuvre and abuse of process of court – Proposed amendments allowed so that true issues in controversy could be resolved – Far greater injustice if plaintiff’s case was limited prematurely – Order 20 r. 5 Rules of the High Court 1980

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
For the Company – Terence KM Chan

Industrial Court

Issue was that on dismissal but was settled.

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
For the plaintiff – Lim Kian Leong (Low Chi Cheng with him); M/s Lim Kian Leong & Co

High Court

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Summary judgment – Settlement agreement – Whether triable issues existed – Defendant executed Settlement Agreement to pay reduced debt but defaulted – Plaintiff terminated Settlement Agreement and reinstated original debt – Plaintiff entitled to default and penalty interest forming part of its claim – Conclusive evidence clause – Whether plaintiff was negligent in selling shares charged to it – Marginal difference in sale proceeds and defendant’s valuation of shares – Whether too minimal to attribute negligence on plaintiff

CONTRACT: Settlement – Settlement Agreement – Breach of agreement – Admissions by defendant in Settlement Agreement – Whether admissions made in the course of negotiations and hence inadmissible – Defendant acknowledged liability for reduced debt but not difference in original indebtedness and reduced debt

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
For the Plaintiff – Lim Kian Leong & Low Chi Cheng; T/n Lim Kian Leong & Co

High Court

Issue was on joinder of parties (14 additional Defendants).

COUNSEL & SOLICITOR:
For the Applicant in Enc. 404, 413, 417, 419, 421, 423, 415 and 4277 Plaintiff – Low Chi Cheng; T/n Lim Kian Leong & Co

High Court

Issue was on recovery of monies, striking out, and to adduce fresh evidence.